Page 1 of 7
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC November 21, 2000
RE: THE RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
RESOLUTION
Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson, Technical Working
Group, Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court, submitting for the
consideration and approval of the Court the proposed "The Rule of
Procedure for Small Claims Cases," the Court Resolved to APPROVE the
same.
The Rule shall take effect on October 01, 2008 following its publication two
(2) newspaper of general circulation.
September 9, 2008
RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
Section 1. Title. - This Rule shall be known as " The Rule of Procedure for
Small Claims Cases."
Section 2. Scope. - This Rule shall govern the procedure in actions before
the Metropolitan trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial
Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts for payment of money where the
value of the claim does not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00) exclusive of interest and costs.
Section 3. Definiton of Terms. - For purposes of this Rule:
(a) Plaintiff - refers to the party who initiated a small claims action.
The term includes a defendant who has filed a counterclaim
against plainfill;
(b) Defendant - is the party against whom the plaintiff has filed a
small claims action. The term includes a plaintiff against whom a
defendant has filed a claim, or a person who replies to the claim;
(c) Person - is an individual, corporation, partnership, limited
liability partnership, association, or other juridical entity endowed
with personality by law;
(d) Individual - is a natural person;
(e) Motion - means a party's request, written or oral, to the court
for an orderaction. It shall include an informal written request to
the court, such as a letter;
(f) Good cause - means circumtances sufficient to justify the
requested order or other action, as determined by the judge; and
(g) Affidavit - means a written statement or declaration of facts
that are shown or affirmed to be true.
Section 4. Applicability - The Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
shall apply this Rule in all actions which are; (a) purely civil in nature where
the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment or
reimbursement of sum of money, and (b) the civil aspect of criminal action,
or reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in court, pursuant to Rule
of 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
These claims or demands may be;
(a) For money owned under any of the following;
1. Contract of Lease;
2. Contract of Loan;
3. Contract of Services;
4. Contract of Sale; or
5. Contract of Mortgage;
(b) For damages arising from any of the following;
1. Fault or negligence;
2. Quasi-contract; or
3. Contract;
(c) The enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an
arbitration award involving a money claim covered by this Rule
pursuant to Sec. 417 of Republic Act 7160, otherwise known as
the Local Government Code of 1991.
Section 5. Commencement of Small Claims Action. - A small claims action
is commenced by filing with the court an accomplished and verified
Statement of Claim (Form 1 - SCC) in duplicate, accompanied by a
Certification of Non-forum Shopping (Form 1-A,SCC), and two (2) duly
certified photocopies of the actionable document/s subjects of the claim, as
well as the affidavits of witnesses and other evidence to support the claim.
No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to
or submitted together with the Claim, unless good cause is shown for the
admission of additional evidence.
No formal pleading, other than the Statement of Claim described in this
Rule, is necessary to initiate a small claims action.
Section 6. Joinder of Claims - Plaintiff may join in a single statement of
claim one or more separate small claims against a defendant provided that
the total amount claimed, exclusive of interest and costs, does not exceed
P100,00.00.
Section 7. Affidavits - The affidavits submitted under this Rule shall state
only facts of direct personal knowledge of the affiants which are admissible
in evidence.
A violation of this requirement shall subject the party, and the counsel who
assisted the party in the preparation of the affidavits, if any, to appropriate
disciplinary action. The inadmissible affidavit(s) or portion(s) thereof shall
be expunged from the record.
Section 8. Payment of Filing Fees. - The plaintiff shall pay the docket and
other legal fees prescribed under Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court,
unless allowed to litigate as an indigent.

A claim filed with a motion to sue as indigent (Form 6-SCC) shall be referred
to the Executive Judge for immediate action in case of multi-sala courts, or
to the Presiding Judge of the court hearing the small claims case. If the
motion is granted by the Executive Judge, the case shall be raffled off or
assigned to the court designated to hear small claims cases. If the motion
is denied, the plaintiff shall be given five (5) days within which to pay the
docket fees, otherwise, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice. In no
case shall a party, even if declared an indigent, be exempt from the payment
of the P1,000.00 fee for service of summons and processes in civil cases.
Section 9. Dismissal of the Claim. - After the court determines that the case
falls under this Rule, it may, from an examination of the allegations of the
Statement of Claim and such evidence attached thereto, by itself, dismiss
the case outright of any of the grounds apparent from the Claim for the
dismissal of a civil action.
Section 10. Summons and Notice of Hearing - If no ground for dismissal is
found, the court shall forthwith issue Summons (Form 2-SCC) on the day of
receipt of the Statement of Claim, directing the defendant to submit a
verified Response.
The court shall also issue a Notice (Form 4-SCC) to both parties, directing
them to appear before it on a specific date and time for hearing, with a
warning that no unjustified postponement shall be allowed, as provided in
Section 19 of this Rule.
The summons and notice to be served on the defendant shall be
accompanied by a copy of the Statement of Claim and documents
submitted by plaintiff, and a copy of the Response (Form 3-SCC) to be
accomplished by the defendant. The Notice shall contain an express
prohibition against the filing of a motion to dismiss or any other motion under
Section 14 of this Rule.
Section 11. Response - The defendant shall file with the court and serve
on the plaintiff a duly accomplished and verified Response within a non -
extendible period of ten (10) days from receipt of summons. The Response
shall be accompanied by certified photocopies of documents, as well as
affidavits of witnesses and other evidence in support thereof. No evidence
shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted
together with the Response, unless good cause is shown for the admission
of additional evidence.
Section 12. Effect of Failure to File Response - Should the defendant fail
to file his response within the required period, the court by itself shall render
judgement as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the Statement of
claim limited to what is prayed for. The court however, may, in its discretion,
reduce the amount of damages for being excessive or unconscionable
Section 13. Counterclaims Within the Coverage of this Rule - If at the time
the action is commenced, the defendant possesses a claim against the
plaintiff that (a) is within the coverage of this rule, exclusive of interest and
costs; (b) arises out of the same transaction or event that is the subject
matter of the plaintiff's claim; (c) does not require for its adjudication the
joinder of third parties; and (d) is not the subject of another pending action,
the claim shall be filed as a counterclaim in the response; otherwise, the
defendant shall be barred from suit on the counterclaim.
The defendant may also elect to the file a counterclaim against the plaintiff
that does not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence , provided that
the amount and nature thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the
prescribed docket and the other legal fees are paid.
Section 14. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions - The following pleadings,
motions, and petitions shall not be allowed in the cases covered by this
Rule:
(a) Motion to dismiss the compliant except on the ground of lack
of jurisdiction;
(b) Motion for a bill of particulars;
Page 2 of 7
(c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgement, or
for reopening of trial;
(d) Petiton for relief from judgement;
(e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any
other paper;
(f) Memoranda;
(g) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any
interlocutory order issued by the court;
(h) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(i) Dilatory motions for postponement;
(j) Reply;
(k) Third-party complaints; and
(l) Interventions.
Section 15. Availability of Forms; Assistance by Court Personnel. - The
Clerk of Court or other personnel shall provide such assistance as may be
requested by a plaintiff or a defendant regarding the availability of forms
and other information about the coverage, requirements as well as
procedure for small claims cases.
Section 16. Appearance. - the parties shall appear at the designated date
of hearing personally or through a representative authorized under a
Special Power of Attorney (Form 5-SCC ) to enter into an amicable
settlement, to submit of Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) and to enter into
stipulations or admissions of facts and of documentary exhibits
Section 17. Appearance of Attorneys Not Allowed. - No attorney shall
appear in behalf of or represent a party at the hearing, unless the attorney
is the plaintiff or defendant.
If the court determines that a party cannot properly present his/her claim or
defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow
another individual who is not an attorney to assist that party upon the latter's
consent.
Section 18. Non-appearance of Parties. - Failure of the plaintiff to appear
shall be cause for the dismissal of the claim without prejudice. The
defendant who appears shall be entitled to judgement on a permissive
counterclaim.
Failure of the defendant to appear shall have the same effect as failure to
file a Response under Section 12 of this Rule. This shall not apply where
one of two or more defendants who are sued under a common cause of
action and have pleaded a common defense appears at the hearing.
Failure of both parties to appear shall cause the dismissal with prejudice of
both the claim and counterclaim.
Section 19. Postponement When Allowed. - A request for postponement of
a hearing may be granted only upon proof of the physical inability of the
party to appear before the court on the scheduled date and time. A party
may avail of only one (1) postponement.
Section 20. Duty of the Court. - At the beginning of the court session, the
judge shall read aloud a short statement explaining the nature, purpose and
the rule of procedure of small claims cases.

Section 21. Judicial Dispute Resolution. - At the hearing, the judge shall
conduct Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) through mediation, conciliation,
early neutral evaluation, or any other mode of JDR. Any settlement (Form
7-SCC) or resolution (Form 8-SCC) of the dispute shall be reduced into
writing, signed by the parties and submitted to the court for approval (Form
12-SCC).
Section 22. Failure of JDR. - If JDR fails and the parties agree in
writing (Form 10-SCC) that the hearing of the case shall be presided over
by the judge who conducted the JDR, the hearing shall so proceed in an
informal and expeditious manner and terminated within one (1) day.
Absent such agreement, (a) in case of a multi-sala court , the case shall, on
the same day, be transmitted (Form 11-SCC) to the Office of the Clerk of
Court for immediate referral by the Executive Judge to the pairing judge for
hearing and decision within five (5) working days from referral; and (b) in
case of single sala court, the pairing judge shall hear and decide the case
in the court of origin within five (5) working days from referral by the JDR
judge.
Section 23. Decision. - After the hearing, the court shall render its decision
on the same day, based on the facts established by the evidence (Form 13-
SCC). The decision shall immediately be entered by the Clerk of Court in
the court docket for civil cases and a copy thereof forthwith served on the
parties.
The decision shall be final and unappealable.
Section 24. Execution. - If the decision is rendered in favor of the plaintiff,
execution shall issue upon motion (Form 9-SCC).
Section 25. Applicability. of the Rules of Civil Procedure - The Rules of Civil
procedure shall apply suppletorily insofar as they are not inconsistent with
this rule.
Section 26. Effectivity. - This Rule shall take effect on October 01, 2008 for
the pilot courts designated to apply the procedure for small claims cases
following its publication in two newspaper of general circulation.
RATIONALE of the Proposed Rule of Procedure for Small Claims
Cases
a. Introduction
The most significant recurring theme of every program for judicial
reform of the Supreme Court is the pressing need for a more
accessible, much swifter and less expensive delivery of justice.
Undeniably, the slow grind of the wheels of justice is the result of
a variety of factors, foremost of which is the perennial congestion
of court dockets which has transformed court litigation into a
protracted battle, that invariably exhausts the time, effort and
resources of party-litigants, especially the poor. Many strategies
have been devised to unclog heavy court dockets, and one such
approach is the use on mandatory Pre-trial and Alternative
Dispute Resolutions mechanisms such as mediation, arbitration
and conciliation. Another scheme that has been widely used in
many foreign legal system but which has yet to be tried in the
Philippines is the small claims case processing method used by
small claims courts, often referred to as the "Peoples Court," as
it comes most directly into contact with the citizenry of a
jurisdiction.
Small claims courts are courts of limited jurisdiction that hear civil
cases between private litigants. Courts authorized to try small
claims may also have other judicial functions, and the name by
which such a court is known varies by jurisdiction: it may be
known by such names as county court or magistrates court.
Small claims courts can be found in Australia, Canada, Ireland,
Israel, New Zealand, South Africa, Hong Kong, Singapore, the
United Kingdom and the United States.
Page 3 of 7
b. The History and the Reforms of Small Claims Court
1.In the United States1
For almost a century now, small claims courts have provided a
form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in the United States.
Originating around 1912 or 1913, these courts were established
primarily as a means for small businesses to collect money from
borrowers through a process that was faster, less formal, and
less expensive than traditional civil litigation.
Following the lead of the establishment of the initial small claim
court in Kansas, USA in 1912 or 1913, every state in the United
States has created some form of a small claims court system.
Although the financial claims limits, methods or procedure, and
overall structure vary from state to state, the concept is
essentially the same, i.e., that relatively minor disputes, involving
dollar amounts that are insufficient to warrant processing the
case through the normal court procedure, justify expeditious and
simplified handling.
The consumer justice reform movements of the 1960s and 1970s
brought renewed research and interest in the small claims courts.
This movement emphasized the need for reform of small claims
courts to facilitate the adjudication of consumer grievances.
Although "consumer justice reformers" were concerned that
businesses and corporations were more likely to use attorneys in
small claims courts thereby placing inexperienced individual
defendants at a disadvantage, studies showed that defendants
with an attorney were more likely to win against plaintiffs than
unrepresented defendants, whereas palintiffs without attorneys
did just as well as represented plaintiffs against unrepresented
defendants. The result was an appraisal of the need to bar
attorneys and collection agencies from the small claims
courts.lawphil.net
Small claims courts in the United States are often considered
courts of equity and are not necessarily bound by the letter of the
law. The courts have flexibility to use more holistic approaches to
problem solving and dispute resolution than what is typical. Most
judges act according to what makes sense to them, even if this
means setting aside legal formalities. Moreover, traditional rules
of evidence and court processes do not apply. The rules of small
claims courts emphasize conciliation and pragmatism over
winning, and rules of evidence and evil procedure have been
simplified to allow maximum access to the courts by individuals
unable to afford an attorney.
2. Small Claims Courts in Canada2
All provinces in Canada have procedures for small claims. In
general, there are two different models. In most provinces, as in
British Columbia, Alberta, and new Brunswick, small claims
courts operate independently of the superior courts. In other
jurisdictions, the small claims courts are either branches or
divisions of the superior courts.
The small claims courts are meant to be an easier and less
expensive way to resolve disputes than in the superior courts.
Small Claims Court procedure is regulated both by provincial
legislation and rules in most provinces. It is simplified and less
costly with no strict pleading requirements and formal discovery
process.
3. Small Claims Courts in England and Wales?3
From early times, England had a tradition of local courts where
ordinary men could pursue justice in the form of civil claims
without the aid of lawyers. Some were set up by local statutes,
others by custom. These local courts could not keep pace with

the changes in the society brought about by the Industrial
Revolution. By the 1830s, the decade of great liberal reform,
there was a great public awakening to the urgent need for
constitutional reform in the administration of justice. The result
was the County Courts Act of 1846, described in its preamble as
an "Act For The More Easy Recovery of Small Debts and
Demands in England. " It was initially a poor mans court. Andrew
Amos, the first judge at Marylebone County, described regular
litigants as being "a great proportion of the poorer classes,
gaining their livelihoods by bricklaying, gardening or other out of
door occupations against whom are usually issued in the summer
months." The county courts jurisdiction for claims brought in
contract and tort gradually increased from 50 in1888 to 5,000
in 1894.
The purpose and structure of the county court system has in
many ways remained the same since 1846. The aim is still to
make civil justice available locally there are now 223 county
courts in England and Wales. They have continued to be
responsive to the needs of smaller cases which, although small
in terms of their financial value, are important to the litigants
involved. However, recent decades have seen two major
changes in relation to small claims first, the introduction of the
Civil procedure Rules reforms of 1998 with emphasis on
proportionality.
4
Since January 1996, when the small claims limits in England and
Wales was trebled overnight to 3,000, district judges have been
expected to play the role of "interventionist" and assist litigants in
presenting their own cases personally at small claims hearings.
Like adjudicators in other parts of the world, district judges in
these countries have been encouraged to intervene to an
increasing extent at small claims hearings. Such interventionism
is, indeed, vital and although there may be wide variations
between jurisdictions in the methods that are adopted to deal with
small claims, the idea of the adjudicator freely entering the arena
of the dispute to assist unrepresented litigants is fundamental in
almost all matters about small claims.
4. Small Claims Tribunals in Singapore5
The Small Claims Tribunals in Singapore have been in operation
since 1 February 1985. The tribunals have fulfilled an integral role
in providing the community with accessible justice for civil claims
involving small amounts. Various features and programs have
been put in place to enhance access to justice for the community,
by removing barriers such as cost, delay, distance, time and
inconvenience. The Tribunals, constituted as part of the
Subordinate Courts of Singapore, were established for the
primary purpose of providing a quick and inexpensive avenue for
the resolution of small claims arising from disputes between
consumers and suppliers. There was a need for a less expensive
and less formal forum to deal with such small claims. Hence, in
1985, the Small Claims Tribunals Act was passed, which
authorized the setting up of one or more Tribunals to help
consumers who have claims of up to $2,000 relating to disputes
arising from contracts for the sale of goods or the provision of
services.
c. Introduction of the Concept of Small Claims Court in the
Philippines
The idea of establishing Small Claims Courts in the Philippines
was first proposed to the Supreme Court through a study
conducted in 1999 by Justice Josue N. Bellosillo, former Senior
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. After observing small
claims courts and interviewing judges of such courts in Dallas,
Texas, United States in 1999, Justice Bellosillo proposed in a
Report that courts can be established in the Philippines to handle
exclusively small claims without the participation of lawyers and
Page 4 of 7
where ordinary litigants can prosecute and defend a small claims
action through ready-made forms. He envisioned the small claims
courts as another positive approach, in addition to mandatory
pre-trial, for solving court congestion and delay. 6The study and
report was subsequently endorsed for legislative action to
Senator Franklin Drilon who later funded a project for this
purpose.
At the regular session of the Fourteenth Congress, House Bill No.
2921 entitled "An Act Establishing Small Claims Courts" was
introduced by Congressman Jose V. Yap. Thereafter, on July 3,
2007, Senate Bill No. 800 entitled "Philippines Small Claims
Court Act" was filed by Senator Ramon A. Revilla, Jr. and, on
September 3, 2007, the bill passed First Reading and was
referred to the Committee(s) on Justice and Human Rights and
Finance. The same is still pending with these committees at
present.
In 2007, the United States Agency for International Development
(USAID) awarded a two-year grant to the American Bar
Association Rule of Law Initiative (ABA-ROLI) to pursue judicial
reform activities in the Philippines for the fiscal period October
2007 to September 30, 2009. 7In a letter to Chief Justice Reynato
S. Puno dated October 10, 2007, ABA-ROLI proposed the
establishment of small claims pilot courts among first level courts
in different regions of the Philippines. The small claims pilot court
project was proposed by ABA to USAID after consultation with
various Supreme Court officials in conjunction with the 2000
Action Plan for Judicial Reform.
Among the critical issues being addressed by the APJR are case
congestion and delay. The congestion of case dockets is central
to a multitude of problems, either as cause or effect; it is either
the manifestation of the source of other difficulties. Addressing
this concern is thus an imperative8 which is why present reforms
in judicial systems and procedures have included the following:
1. streamlining procedural rules to eliminate provisions
that cause delay and permit dilatory tactics;
2. re-engineering the jurisdictional structure of the courts
to ensure easy geographical access to the courts
particularly by the poor litigants.
3. improving the case management system toward more
transparency, accountability and integrity of the judicial
process and for better efficiency; and
4. strengthening of the mediation mechanism to promote
early dispute resolution nationwide. This involves the
institutionalization of court-annexed mediation, and the
establishment of a Mediation Center to continually
monitor and assess the performance of the system and
provide training and research.
Notwithstanding the absence of a law at the present time creating
small claims courts in our country, 10the Supreme Court through
a program in partnership with ABA-ROLI and USAID, can
promulgate and implement a simplified rule of procedure
exclusively for small claims and assign a certain number of
existing first level courts to take cognizance of small
claims. 11This does not need legislative action as the Court can
designate several first level courts all over the country to jump-
start the pilot project. Thus, pursuant to its rule-making
power, 12the Court under the present Constitution can adopt a
special rule of procedure to govern small claims cases and select
pilot courts that would empower the people to bring suits before
them pro se to resolve legal disputes involving simple issues of
law and procedure without the need for legal representations and
extensive judicial intervention. This system will enhance access
to justice especially by those who cannot afford the high costs of
litigation even in cases of relatively small value.13 It is expeditious
rules and means, our Court can improve the perception of justice
in this country, thus giving citizens a renewed "stake" in
preserving peace in the land. This is a hopeful message to our
people that "there is no need to despair for there is deliverance

in law; that is a promise that has been fulfilled by law in the past;
it is a promise law will again fulfill in the future."14
In December 2007, the Supreme Court established a Technical
Working Group composed of the Court Administrator, the
Program Management Office Administrator, selected judges and
other officials of the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines to undertake the following activities:
5. The development of Rules and Procedures to
Implement pilot Small Claims Courts;
6. The establishment of Criteria to Select Appropriate
regions/Judges for pilot Small Claims Courts and set
Peso Limits for the Small Claims Courts;
7. Through the Philippine Judicial Academy, the conduct
of training programs for Judges and their personnel
participating in the Pilot Small Claims Courts project;
and
8. The employment of "justice on Wheels" buses to
launch pilot small claims tribunals.
15
On June 23, 2008, the Technical Working Group finalized its draft
of a Rule of procedure for Small Claims Cases. Highlights of the
Proposed Rule are the following;
IX. The Rule governs the procedure in actions before
the first level courts, i.e., Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trials Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial
Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
(excluding Sharia Circuit Courts) for the payment
of money where the value of the claim does not
exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(100,000.00) exclusive of interest and costs.
Explanatory note: The purpose of a small claims
process is to provide an inexpensive and expeditious
means to settle disputes over small amounts. For
purposes of the project, the amount has been set for
claims involving amounts of not more than
100,000.00.
The theory behind the small claims system is that
ordinary litigation fails to bring practical justice to the
parties when the disputed claim is small, because the
time and expense required by the ordinary litigation
process is so disproportionate to the amount involved
that it discourages a just resolution of the dispute. The
small claims process is designed to function quickly
and informally. There are no attorneys, no formal
pleadings and no strict legal rules of evidence. The
small claims court system is not a " typical inferior
court." Parties are encouraged to file small claims court
actions to resolve their minor disputes as opposed to
resorting to self-help or forcible means to seek their
remedy. (Pace v. Hillcrest Motor Co.,161 Cal. Rptr.
663, 664 Ct. App. 1980)
X. This Rule applies to all actions that are: (a) purely
civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for
by the plaintiff is solely for
payment/reimbursement of a sum of money, and
(b) the civil aspect of criminal actions, either filed
prior to the institution of the criminal action, or
reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in
court, pursuant to Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure. These claims or demands may
be:
a. For money owed under any of the following:
1. Contract of lease;
Page 5 of 7
2. Contract of loan;
3. Contract of services;
4. Contract of sale; or
5. Contract of mortgage;
b. For damages arising from:
1. Fault or negligence;
2. Quasi-contract; or
3. Contract;
c. Enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration
award involving money claims covered by this Rule pursuant to Sec.
417 of Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the "Local
Government Code of 1991."
Explanatory Note: The kinds of cases that can be filed in Small Claims
Court vary, but the case must seek money only. For example, a suit
cannot be brought in Small Claims Court to force a person or business
to fix a damaged good; or to demand fulfillment of a promised
obligation which is not purely for money, or to seek money to
compensate for pain and suffering. Some of the kinds of cases which
are allowed as small claims include the following:
4. Actual damage caused to vehicles, other personal property,
real property or person;
5. Payment or reimbursement for property, deposit, or money
loaned;
6. Payment for services rendered, insurance claim, rent,
commissions, or for goods sold and delivered;
7. Money claim pursuant to contact, warranty or agreement;
and
8. Purely civil action for payment of money covered by
bounced or stopped check.
A small claims action is commenced by filing with the court an
accomplished and verified Statement of Claim in duplicate,
accompanied by Certification of Non-Forum Shopping, a nd two (2)
duly certified photocopies of the actionable document/s subject of the
claim. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not
attached to or submitted together with the Claim, unless good cause
is shown for the admission of additional evidence.
Plaintiff may join in a single Statement of Claim one or more separate
small claims against a defendant as long as the costs, does not
exceed P100,000.00.
The plaintiff shall pay the prescribed fees upon filing, unless allowed
to litigate as an indigent.
For the purposes of this rule: (a) Plaintiff is the party who has filed a
small claims action. The term includes a defendant who has filed a
counterclaim against a plaintiff, (b) Defendant is the party against
whom the plaintiff has a filed a small claims action. The term includes
a plaintiff against whom defendant has filed a claim, or a person who
replies to the claim; (c) Person is an individual, corporation,
partnership, limited liability partnership, association, or other entity;
(d) Individual is natural person: (e) Motion means a partys request,
written or oral, to the court for an order or other action. It shall include
an informal written request to the court, such as a letter; (f) Good
cause means circumstances sufficient to justify the requested order
or other action, as determined by the judge; and (g) Affidavit means a
written statement or declaration of facts that are sworn or affirmed to
be true.
Explanatory Note: A plaintiff may commence an action in the
small claims court by filing a Statement of claim under oath with
the Clerk of the first level court in person or by mail. The claim
form shall be a simple non technical form approved or adopted
by the Supreme Court. The claim form shall set forth (1) the name
and address of the defendant, if known; (2) the amount and the
basis of the claim: (3) that the plaintiff, where possible, has
demanded payment and, in applicable cases, possession of the
property; (4) that the defendant has failed or refused to pay, and
where applicable, has refused to surrender the property; and (5)
that the plaintiff understands that the judgement on his or her
claim will be conclusive and without a right of appeal. The plaintiff
should attach to the claim all documents necessary to proved
his/her right to reliefs prayed for. The form or accompanying

instructions shall include information that the plaintiff (1) may not
represented by an attorney; (2) has no right to appeal; and (3)
may ask the court to waive fees for filing and serving the claim on
the ground that the plaintiff is indigent unable to pay them, using
the forms approved by the Supreme Court for the purpose.
The Court may dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds for
dismissal of a civil actions provided by the Rules of the Civil
Procedure. A defendant may challenges jurisdiction or venue or court
location by including these defenses in his Response before
appearing in the hearing, the court shall inquire into the facts
sufficiently to determine whether jurisdiction and authority of the
court over the action are proper, and shall make its determination
accordingly.
Explanatory Note: Jurisdiction and venue requirements in small
claims action shall be the same as in other civil actions provided
in the Rules of Civil Procedure. A defendant may challenge
jurisdiction or venue or court location by including these defenses
in his Response before appearing in the scheduled hearing. In all
cases, even if the defendant does not ask for dismissal of the
case in the Response or appear at the hearing, the court shall
inquire into the facts sufficiently to determine whether jurisdiction
and authority of the court over the action are proper, and shall
make its determination accordingly.
No Motion to Dismiss shall be allowed except on the grounds under
Section 13 thereof (See No. X below).
Should the defendant fail to file a response within the required period,
the court shall render judgement as may be warranted by the facts
alleged in the Statement of Claim and limited to what prayed for
therein. The court may, in its discretion, reduce the amount of
damages for being excessive or otherwise unconscionable.
If at the time the action is commenced, a defendant possesses a claim
against the plaintiff that (a) is within the coverage of this Rule,
exclusive of interest and costs; (b) arises out of the same transaction
or event that is the subject matter of the plaintiffs claim; (c) does not
require, for its adjudication, the joiner or third parties; and (d) is not
the subject of another pending action, this claim shall be included as
a counterclaim in the Response, otherwise, such counterclaim shall
be barred.
The defendant may also elect to include in the Response a
counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not arise out of
the transaction or occurrence provided that the amount and
nature thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the
prescribed docket fees are paid.
Explanatory Note: If a defendant has claim against a plaintiff that
exceeds the limits stated in Section 2 of this Rule, and the claim
relates to the contract, transaction, matter, or event which is the
subject of the plaintiffs claim, the defendant may commence an
action against the plaintiff in a court of competent jurisdiction. If
said claim which is beyond the limit of money claim provided in
this Rule is filed with the Response befire the Small Claims Court,
the latter shall dismiss the counterclaim.
Prohibited pleadings and motions: (a) Motion to dismiss the complaint
except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction; (b) Motion for bill of
particulars; (c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a
judgement, or for reopening of trial; (d) Petition for relief from
judgement; (e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings,
affidavits, or any other paper; (f) Memoranda; (g) Petition for certiorari,
mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by
the court; (h) Motion to declare the defendant in default; (i) Dilatory
motions for postponement; (j) Reply; (k) Third-party complaints; and
(l) Interventions.
Availability of Forms for the Parties who shall be assisted by Clerk of
Court.
The parties must personally appear at the hearing; if unable, then
through a designated representative who must be duly authorized to
enter into an amicable settlement.
Page 6 of 7
Attorneys are not allowed at the hearing, except as plaintiff or
defendant. However this does not preclude them from offerings their
services in assisting the party to small claims case to prepare for the
hearing or for other matters outside of the hearing. If the court
determines that a party cannot properly present his/her claim of
defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow
another individual, who is not an attorney, to assist that party upon
the latters consent.
Explanatory Note: Except as permitted by this section, no
attorney shall appear in a small claims action except when the
latter shall maintain or defend an action in any of the following
capacities:
0. By or against himself or herself;
1. By or against a partnership in which he or she is
general partner and in which all the partners are
attorneys; or
2. By or against a professional corporation of which he or
she is an officer or director and of which all other
officers and directors are attorneys.
Nothing in this section shall prevent an attorney from doing any
of the following:
3. Providing advice to a party to a small claims action,
either before or after the commencement of the action;
or
4. Submitting an affidavit as a witness for a party in order
to state facts of which he or she has personal
knowledge and about which he or she competent to do
so.
If the court determines that the party does not speak or
understand English or Filipino sufficiently to comprehend the
proceedings or give testimony, to the questions of the court, if
any, and needs assistance in so doing, the court may permit
another individual (other than an attorney) to assist that the party.
Any additional continuances shall be at the sound discretion of
the court. If the court interpreter or other competent interpreter of
the language or dialect known to the party is not available to aid
that party in a small claims action, at the first hearing of the case
the court shall postpone the hearing one time only to allow the
party the opportunity to obtain another individual (other than an
attorney) to assist that party An additional continuances shall be
at the sound discretion of the court.
XV. Non-appearance of Parties. Failure of the plaintiff to
appear shall be a cause for the dismissal of the
complaint without prejudice. The defendant who
appears shall be entitled to judgement on a permissive
counterclaim.
On the other hand failure of the defendant to appear
shall have the same effect as failure to file a Response
under Section 12 of this Rule. This is however shall not
apply where one of two or more defendants sued under
a common cause of action and who pleaded a common
defense shall appear at the hearing.
Failure of both parties to appear shall causes the
dismissal with prejudice of both the claim and
counterclaim.
XVI. A request for postponement of a hearing may be
granted only upon proof of the physical inability of the
party to appear before the court on that date and time.
Every party may avail of only one (1) postponement.

Explanatory Note: A Party may submit an oral or written
request to postpone a hearing date for good cause, as
follows:
0. If the written request is writing, it may be made
either by letter or on a form adopted or approved
by the Supreme Court;
1. The request shall be filed before the hearing date
and accompanied by proof of physical inability,
unless the court determines that the requesting
party has good cause to file the request on the
date of hearing itself: and
2. If the court finds that the interest of justice would
be served by postponing the hearing, the court
shall do so and shall notify all parties by mail on
the same day of the new hearing date, time and
place.
This section does not limit the inherent power of the court to
order postponement of hearing in strictly appropriate
circumstances. The postponement fee of One Hundred
Pesos (or as provided in Rule 141, Revised Rules of Court,
as amended on Legal Fees) shall be charged and collected
before the filing of a request for postponement and
rescheduling of a hearing date.
XVII. Judicial Dispute Resolution. At the hearing, the court
shall exert all efforts to encourage the parties to resolve
their dispute through mediation, conciliation, early
neutral evaluating or any other mode of JDR. Any
settlement or resolution of the dispute shall be reduced
into writing, signed by the parties, and submitted to the
court for approval.
XVIII. If JDR fails and the parties agree in writing (Form 10-
SCC) that the hearing of the case shall be presided over
by the judge who conducted the JDR, the hearing shall
so proceed in an informal and expeditious manner and
terminated within one (1) day.
Absent such agreement, (a) in case of a multi-sala
court, the court shall, on the same day, be transmitted
(Form 11-SCC) to the Office of the Clerk of Court for
immediate referral by the Executive Judge to the pairing
judge for hearing and decision within five (5) working
days from referral; and )b) in case of a single sala court,
the pairing judge shall hear and decide the case in the
court of origin within five (5) working days from referral
by the JDR judge.
Explanatory Note: In hearing before the small claims court,
witnesses shall still be sworn in. The judge shall conduct the
hearing in an informal manner so as to do substantial justice
between the parties. The judge shall have the discretion to
admit all evidence which may be of probative value although
not in accordance with formal rules of practice, procedure,
pleading or evidence provided in the Rules of Court, except
that privileged communications shall not be admissible. The
object of such hearings shall be to determine the rights of
the litigants on the merits and to dispense expeditious
justice between the parties.
An interventionist role by judges in such hearings is effective
in eliciting evidence from litigants in person. It is seen by
unrepresented parties as a "helping hand" which they
appreciate, provided that judges avoid the danger of
appearing to be partial. By discussing the facts of the case,
judges find what common ground does exist between the
parties. This tends to narrow the differences between the
parties and make the final judicial decision easier whereas
traditional open court trials, with the presence of lawyers
and the use of cross-examination tend to polarize the
parties, increase antagonism and heighten the differences.
Page 7 of 7
In this regard, Lord Woolf, Great Britains case management
expert, has observed:
"The role of the judge in small claims is not only
that of an adjudicator. It is a key safeguard of the
rights of both parties. In most cases, the judge is
effectively a substitute for a legal representative.
His duty is to ascertain the main matters at issue,
to elicit the evidence, to reach a view on the facts
of the matter and to give a decision. In some
cases he may encourage the parties to settle. In
doing so he should ensure that both parties have
presented the evidence and called the witnesses
germane to their case and that he has identified
and considered any issue of law which is pertinent
to the case in hand. He must also hold the ring
and ensure that each party has a fair chance to
present his own case and to challenge that of his
opponent."
The key judicial skills in conducting such hearings are to
maintain a balance between informality and fairness, to
ensure a level playing field and to protect the weak and the
scrupulous. In practice, this is achieved by preventing
interruptions and parties talking over each other, and
making it clear that both parties will have plenty of time to
say all that they wish before the end of the hearing.
XIX. Decision. After the hearing, the court shall, on the same
day, render its decision using the form provided. The
decision shall immediately be entered by the Clerk of
Court in the court docket for civil cases and a copy
thereof served on the parties. The decision is final and
unappealable.
Explanatory Note: Despite the relative informality of the
procedure, judgements are based upon a strict application
of the substantive law and an objective judicial analysis of
the facts. The judge is duty-bound to give the legal basis for
the findings.
The prohibition against appeals assures immediate and
swift justice.
The right to appeal is not a natural right nor a part due
process. It is merely a statutory privilege and a procedural
remedy of statutory origin, a remedy that may be exercised
only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of
the law authorizing such exercise. The applicable provisions
of the law allowing appeals from decisions of the first level
courts are Sections 36 of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended, also
known as "The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980." The
procedure on appeal is subject to the limitations and
restrictions provided by this Act and any such rules as the
Supreme Court may hereafter prescribe. Sec. 36 of B.P.
Blg. 129 provides an instance wherein the Supreme Court
may adopt special procedures, including cases where
appeal may not be allowed, to achieve an expeditious and
inexpensive determination of particular cases requiring
summary disposition.
XX. Execution. If the decision is rendered in favor of the
plaintiff, execution shall issue upon motion (Form 9-
SCC).